October 1996 Gasification Archive

From eaftdc at seark.net Thu Oct 3 12:30:27 1996
From: eaftdc at seark.net (Carol Cross)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:13 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Is this list still working?
Message-ID: <199610031659.LAA07504@venus.seark.net>

Haven't received information laately. Are wwe still operational?

Sharing and caring

Dr. Carol
Carol Cross, Ph.D. EcoAgroForestry Founder
Email:eaftdc@seark.net Phone & FAX: 501-367-8736.
P O Box 398, Parma, MI 49269
For Free Western Hemisphere Export Trade Newsletter send email saying
SUBSCRIBE WESHEMOL. Together we Can Create A Sustainable World Through
EcoAgroForestry (Sustainable Agriculture, Sustainable Forestry and Rural
AgroIndustrial Development) by growing Kenaf, utilizing AgroResidues,
forming consortiums, & developing Rural AgroIndustrial Centers (RAICs) or
EcoAgroForestry Village Business Incubators(VBI). Free Kenaf Newsletter -
Just Say SUBSCRIBE KENAFOL. Join us.

"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." (Gandhi)

From 73002.1213 at CompuServe.COM Sun Oct 6 11:43:22 1996
From: 73002.1213 at CompuServe.COM (Tom Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:13 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Premixed and diffusion flames
Message-ID: <961006154604_73002.1213_FHM47-23@CompuServe.COM>

Hi Rolland and Prasad, and Ron and Grant: Stoveland, The Netherlands

I spent yesterday at Twente University and will spend today with Prasad at
Eindhoven talking about stoves. I met Roland Siemons and saw some of the new
stoves he has and may test. I hope he will get involved in these discussions.

Let me say in different words what Ron said to Grant because I believe it is not
fully appreciated.

1) DIFFUSION FLAMES:

Until about 1840 all flames were diffusion flames (like a candle or match or
wood fire) in which a source of fuel makes vapor which mixes by natural
convection with the surrounding air. Such a flame is low intensity and dirty,
since the fuel is cracked to soot before the oxygen reaches it to generate the
heat.

This is useful in the candle, since we need it's light. Much of the soot may
burn (as in the candle flame), but if one places an object (spoon) in the flame
before combustion is complete, it quenches the combustion, allowing unburned
fuel and soot to escape. (Please examine a candle flame closely, then put a
teaspoon halfway up the flame and observe the soot and smell.)

A diffusion flame has some use for light (the candle) or space heating (the
fireplace and preferably the stove. But it is inherently wasteful for cooking,
since

1) the small visible and huge infra red radiation cools the flame.
2) the heat is only generated at the fuel-air interface envelope which has a
large area

The full combustion only occurs above the visible fire. In an attempt to get the
pot close to the fire, you quench much of the combustion. If there is water in
the pot, so much the worse. So, sad to say, I don't think there is much future
for improved wood stoves and I blame it all on the diffusion flame.

2) PREMIXED FLAMES:
A correctly premixed air-fuel flame (like a Bunsen burner, gas stove or a gas
furnace) burns all the fuel at the flame front in a layer <0.1 mm thick and
produces very little radiatin. All the heat is available above this point in
the cross section of the flame. For a century producer gas (CO+H2) and now
natural gas stoves have satisfactorily cooked meals with high intensity gas
flames. Wood fires don't compete. Wood-gas fires may have a future.

However, if one makes first the wood into a gas, and then mixes the gas with
air and then burns it, one can have the same advantages as natural gas, propane
or producer gas fires. This is what Ron and I are doing on a small scale.

I hope to visit Shandong Village in which a gasifier fills a gas holder with
wood-gas, the gas is distributed in plastic pipe to each house, and each house
then uses the gas for cooking, lighting (Wellsbach mantles) or refrigeration
(the Kelinator gas refrigerator). The gas can also be used to generate
electricity.

Incidenally, the Wellsbach who invented the beautiful gas mantle was a student
of Bunsen.

Regards to all, TOM REED

From 73002.1213 at CompuServe.COM Sun Oct 6 11:43:20 1996
From: 73002.1213 at CompuServe.COM (Tom Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:13 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Eindhoven Stoves
Message-ID: <961006154557_73002.1213_FHM47-22@CompuServe.COM>

Here's a puzzle: This week I visisted two sites showing gasifier stoves. Do I
post it in the GASIFICATION or the STOVE node? Until I hear otherwise, I'll
post in both places.

Prasad attended my lecture on gasifiers at Twente (Enschede), then we travelled
by train to Eindhoven (2 hours!) to visit his lab yesterday at Eindhoven
University. Nice to meet my "NETPALS" and talk of cabages and kings and a
thousand things as well as our offician interests. Prasad has a bad cough, so
left me in the capable hands of Ettienne Moerman yesterday afternoon.

There are a few dozen kerosene stoves at Einhoven and a dozen or so wood stoves
left from the stove program of the last decade. (Funding has stopped
(temporarily) and no active stove work (except yesterday).

We first set up a Hottenroth ZSMART stove, pre-gasifier and operated it in the
gasifier mode by lighting on top. It burned 275 g of (too dry) pine block fuel
in 20.0 min (13.7 g/min). Assuming 16 mJ/kg for the wood this is an average
power level of 3.7 kWth. Since there was no control on primary air, the fuel
volatiles burned too fast with too little air. After volatile combustion
stopped the charcoal continued to burn another 20 minutes at a level that
Ettienne thought would be sufficient for simmering.

This particular stove was not designed for this use and did not burn all the
volatiles below the pot. In 1988 Harry LaFontaine visited Hottenroth and they
made a few "GAS-I-FIRE"modified stoves that were much are a major advance over
any wood cooking stoves that I have seen, but don't satisfy my "blue flame"
criterion and wouldn't min my $1000 bet with Harry.

We then tested Piet Verhard's "J" gasifier stove. I discussed this concept in
Hawaii about 1985 with Antal and Smith. I believe it was the subject of a
thesis. Who made and operated the first one?

This stove uses a reservoir "pot" of fuel at ground level ignited on the bottom.
Beneath the reservoir there is a horizontal passage to a 1 m stove pipe (hence
the J name). When first lit it burns in an updraft gasifier mode. Then a quick
blast of air on top of the burning fuel convinces the gases to go down through
the fire and up the 1 m stove pipe, producing downdraft gasification in the pot.
The gas burns sort of in the horizontal section, heating a pot placed there;
then up the stove pipe.

Piet: There was a lot of unburned gas at the top of the pipe. A bundle of
inlet air tubes passing through the hot gas under the pot would have given good
combustion before the pot. Your welding is excellent, but the metal is too
heavy gauge and sucks heat from the fire. Same comment for cast ceramic stoves
- more heat to the stove than to the pot.

Insulation seems to be an afterthought with most stove makers, probably based on
the idea that it is "too expensive". (Riser sleeves are $3 each, retail.)

All stovers: It takes 3.3 times (5 kg air /kg biomass) as much secondary air
to burn the volatiles as primary (1.5 kg/kg) to make them. No one is paying
enough attention to providing secondary air. Furthermore, where cold secondary
air hits hot combustible gas the fire may extinguish. Preheating that air
helps. A hot chamber for the combustion also helps.

I was glad to see the J STOVE concept in action, and while not convenient for
cook stoves, it could be useful in brick kilns, bakeries etc.

It was a pleasure to visit Einhoven and Ettienne and Prasad and Piet's J stove.
On to Stockholm and back to gasification.

Regards to all, TOM REED

From 73002.1213 at CompuServe.COM Sun Oct 6 11:43:26 1996
From: 73002.1213 at CompuServe.COM (Tom Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:13 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Paul Wendelbo Stove test in Denmark
Message-ID: <961006154547_73002.1213_FHM47-21@CompuServe.COM>

STOVIFIERS: (A hybred name for gasifier stoves)

Wednesday I had the privelege to visit the Danish Technical University and see
many interesting gasifiers. One of particular interest to me was a "tin can"
stove first developed in 1985 by the Norwegian Paal Wendelbo and used in
Adjumani refugee camps for burning grass.

The stove I saw tested in Denmark operated very well. They have made tests on
efficiency with wood chips and found 25-27% efficiency, 1 liter water boiling
times of 6-12 min using 250 g fuel. Full details in paper by Per S. Nielsen
"Efficiency Tests on the Pyrolysis Gasifier Stove Peko Pe", July 1996.

The following advantages were observed for the stove:
Stove burns ithout smoke when sufficient air is supplied
Emissions of CO are low when sufficient air is supplied
Stove is easy to ignite
Stove is rapid in achieving boiling temperature
When burning grass in Uganda the stove can provide heat enough to boil a meal
in 45 minutes after reaching the boiling temperature
Due to the reduced effect [after volatiles burned] it is possible for the cook
to leave the stove for making other things
Stove is relatively cheap to produce
Stove is esy to move and carry around

Disadvantages compared to three stone stove:
One needs metal for producing the stove
One needs tools and skills to produce the stove
The biomass needs some kind of treatment before it can be used in the stove
[??]
The stove needs sto be produced relatively precisely to obtain the pyrolysis
gases, and especially precisely to achieve teh charcoal effect.
The stove needs dry biomass for achieving the pyrolysis process

[I doubt if Ron Larson would agree about many of these disadvanatages. As in
all things, one can fail if one doesn't pay some attentin. Ron uses two tomato
cans to achieve the same results. I am sure "farmer Jones" found similar faults
with the automobile after he saw his first car.]

*****

I have called this type of stove an "inverted downdraft gasifier stove" and it
operates on the same principle as the one I first built at SERI/NREL in 1985
after seeing the dreadful cooking conditions in S. Africa. It was sold by
Hottenroth-LaFontaine (without my blessing) about 1988-89 after I showed it to
Harry.

This would seem to be a case of simultaneous or parallel invention and I
certainly hope to meet Paal Wendelbo to find out the history of his work. Does
anyone have an E-mail address for him? Can we get him on the net? I'll be in
Stockholm all next week and maybe I can find him.

Regards to all, TOM REED

From 73002.1213 at CompuServe.COM Sun Oct 6 11:48:33 1996
From: 73002.1213 at CompuServe.COM (Tom Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:13 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Re: UpDownCoCounterInverted Gasifiers
Message-ID: <961006154541_73002.1213_FHM47-19@CompuServe.COM>

Dear Ron, STOVES and GASIFICATION all:

Since we are discussing GASIFIER STOVES, I presume we need to put it on both
lists. I spent Thursday afternoon and Friday morning with Prasad - he took his
cold home Friday after lunch. I spent the afternoon with Etienne Moerman
yesterday and he feted me to some exotic beers. We tested Piet Verhardt's stove
and an old Hottenroth in the lab in Eindhoven. See other postings.

The terms "updraft" (air/O2 going up) and downdraft (air going down and fuel
going down) are sort of silly - what would happen in space where there is no up
and down. An improved terminology is Counter-Flow and CO-Flow respectively. A
better name for our "inverted downdraft" would be "inverted co-flow" except that
the fuel only flows "up" if you add an auger under the fuel bed. There is a
larger gasifier operating this way for power generation.

The advantage of UPDRAFT is that the charcoal burning on the grate generates
PLENTY of heat and can use wet fuel. It also generates 10-20% pyrolysis oil. If
you want to put it in an engine, the cleanup train will cost much more than the
gasifier. However, at least two such are being used in Europe today. The high
heat from charcoal burning is sufficient to pyrolyse all the volatiles in the
first 10% of operation and then you have a charcoal stove. (This was the way
Fred Hottenroth operated his stoves until Harry and I turned him around.)

In a DOWNDRAFT gasifier the air contacts biomass in a flaming pyrolysis mode and
leaves less than 0.1% tar. While still requiring cleanup - maybe - it is MUCH
easier than for updraft, and this was the type used in over 1 million vehicles
during WW II. It is very efficient and generates 1 to 3 m3 of gas per m2 of
grate (a superficial velocity of 1 m/sec). If you try to design a stove using
these numbers, a 3 kW stove would have a cross section of 1/ 600 m2 or ....
(10% moisture wood has 16 mJ/kg. 1 m3 of stove gas has an energy content of
about 6 MJ. If you ;t;ry to operate at lower velocities the forced downward
convection loses to the natural updraft and it goes updraft.

In the INVERED DOWNDRAFT stove Air from below first contacts the fuel,
pyrolysing it and leaving the charcoal behind. The pyrolysis oil is not burned
up because the velocity is so much lower. The air flow is supplied by natural
convectin rather than by the draft from the engine.

Now think about what an inverted updraft gasifier would be. (Maybe useless, but
lets discuss it ).

I hope this clears up the terminology. I really need to (a) make a drawing and
(b) do my cigar demonstration to make it crystal clear.

Regards from Schipol Airport, on my way to Stockholm through Frankfurt.

TOM

From 73002.1213 at compuserve.com Sun Oct 6 11:44:52 1996
From: 73002.1213 at compuserve.com (Tom Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:13 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Re: Re[2]: tar
Message-ID: <961006154614_73002.1213_FHM47-27@CompuServe.COM>

Continuing ...

At the IEA meeting in Helsinki last week "tar" (= wood oil + wood tar)
measurement was discussed at great length. There are half a dozen vethods being
used to measure "tar" from collection at 100 C (no water, no light volatiles,
most applicable to engine problems) to collecting everything down to dry ice
temperature. We have no standardizatin of which to use; and we have no
"standard" gasifier on which the results they could be compared.

I am making "clean gas" a major theme of my trip, so I'll be talking about
methods of reaching "clean gas".

Mark: Are you on the GASIFICATION list. I hope to visit the Burlington plant
in November-Dec. Any problems with this? Will you be there any time?

TOM REED

From 73002.1213 at compuserve.com Sun Oct 6 11:45:02 1996
From: 73002.1213 at compuserve.com (Tom Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:13 2004
Subject: GAS-L: District Heating
Message-ID: <961006154510_73002.1213_FHM47-11@CompuServe.COM>

Dear Renewable Readers:

Last Tuesday I visited the district heating plant in G..... in Denmark (with
Soren Houmuller and ). It produces 5 MW of hot water which it
distributes through underground plastic pipes up to 16 kM. It was beautifully
engineered and controlled. Nice to see 20 tons of wood chips stored and
automatically devlivered by crane.

Since the plant condensed the steam at 60C, the plant was operating at 101.5%
efficiency. Paradoxically, in a condensing plant, the higher the moisture
content in the wood, the higher the efficiency. This depends in part on the
fact that Europe rates fuel on the lower heating value, which assumes that the
heat of vaporization of water will be wasted. So in a condensing plant it can
be recovered. The U.S. uses the HIGH heat of combustion, and then doesn't
usually condense it, so our efficiencies are doubly lower.

There are 40 wood fired and 61 straw fired plants about this size in Denmark.
The Danish Technical University is developing gasifiers for wood and straw that
could be put at each plant so the plant would reach its potential of 20-30%
electric power and the balance heat. I hope next time I go to Denmark I will
see these upgraded plants.

I believe there is a small amount of district heating in the U.S. around very
old power plants in the East. The only one I actually know of is in Golden
where waste steam from Coors Brewery heats the campus. I believe it started as
a student design project. I hope we can get this district heating extended to
my house and Bob Baldwin's and all our neighbors, about 1 km from the school.

What would it take to have the U.S. go for district heating in all new plants?
Why are we not serious about energy, even when it saves money?

Opinions? TOM REED

HOW COME THE U.S. doesn't do anything with district heat? Every power plant
could presumably distribute the heat at least within at radius of 20 km (since
the heat is free, now being wasted the economic distance will be greater. Am I
missing something? Do we care that we could increase the

From owner-gasification at crest.org Sun Oct 6 13:59:50 1996
From: owner-gasification at crest.org (by way of Tom Miles <tmiles@teleport.com>)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:13 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Penpals and Netpals
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19961006180149.009eea40@mail.teleport.com>

Date: 06 Oct 96 11:44:32 EDT
From: Tom Reed <73002.1213@CompuServe.COM>

Subject: Pen Pals and Net Pals
Message-ID: <961006154431_73002.1213_FHM47-1@CompuServe.COM>

Hi!

When I was a kid I was encouraged to have a "pen pal" in Europe or Asia that I
would write to every month or so. Maybe I would even get to see them someday.

I have had a week of meeting my NETPALS, Soren Houmuller; Anders Evald; Krishna
Prasad and Etienne Moerman. I had certainly written dozens of letters to each
and now when I write I will be able to remember our good times and good
discussions together.

One advantage of the E-mail system is that we get to know and judge people by
their opinions and thinking and not trivial externalities like age, sex or
species. (One of the advantages of E-mail is that no one knows I am acatually a
dog. - joke from Bill Gates's book.) Still that doesn't mean that we can't
meet face-to-face and know each other even better. It would be nice if we could
put a thumbnail picutre on each letter.

Hi to all my netpals. Maybe I'll meet someday those of you I have only "netted"
so far.

Love to all, TOM REED

From m.deboer at ecn.nl Mon Oct 7 09:11:03 1996
From: m.deboer at ecn.nl (Martin J.R. de Boer)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:13 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Jobs "Down-under"
Message-ID: <14141204602960@ecnpdc.ecn.nl>

Dear listmembers,

Last July I graduated at a Dutch Higher Technical School. I studied
mechanical engineering, with
the differentiation Energy and Gas technology.

I did my graduation study at the Netherlands Energy Research Foundation
(ECN). The main
subject was the determination of the technical and economical feasibility of
a small-scale biomass
(using energy crops, e.g. willow) gasification, under Dutch circumstances.

In december I will go to Australia for a year of working and travelling. In
this year I would like to
work for companies within the (renewable) energy-sector.

My question to you is: Does anyone know people who to contact or who can
help me further in
my conquest for a (temporary) job.

You can contact me for more details and my C.V. (m.deboer@ecn.nl).

Best regards,

Martin de Boer

*************************************************
* Martin J.R. de Boer *
* Netherlands Energy Research Foundation ECN *
* Department Renewable Energy (Biomass) *
* P.O. box 1 *
* 1755 ZG Petten *
* The Netherlands *
* Telephone : +31 224 56 4700 *
* Fax : +31 224 56 3489 *
* E-Mail: m.deboer@ecn.nl *
*************************************************

From Auke.Koopmans at field.fao.org Mon Oct 7 21:07:10 1996
From: Auke.Koopmans at field.fao.org (Koopmans, Auke (FAORAP))
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:14 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Jobs "Down-under"
Message-ID: <3259ABDF@msm.cgnet.com>

Dear Martin,

Try to contact Steven Joseph at
1 davids Close
Somersby NSW 2250
Australia
Tel. 043-404911
Fax 043-404878

Steven's company is called BEST or Biomass Energy Services & Technology Pty.
Ltd and is involved with gasification, stoves, steam engines, etc.

Auke Koopmans
auke.koopmans@field.fao.org
----------
From: owner-gasification
To: BIOENERGY
Cc: GASIFICATION
Subject: GAS-L: Jobs "Down-under"
Date: 07 October 1996 15:13

Return-Path: <owner-gasification@crest.org>
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 1996 15:13:52 +0200
From: "Martin J.R. de Boer" <m.deboer@ecn.nl>
Subject: GAS-L: Jobs "Down-under"
Sender: owner-gasification@crest.org
X-Sender: MDEBOER@ecnpdc.ecn.nl
To: BIOENERGY <bioenergy@crest.org>
Cc: GASIFICATION <gasification@crest.org>
Reply-to: gasification@crest.org
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.1.2
Encoding: 40 TEXT
Precedence: bulk
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Dear listmembers,

Last July I graduated at a Dutch Higher Technical School. I studied
mechanical engineering, with
the differentiation Energy and Gas technology.

In december I will go to Australia for a year of working and travelling. In
this year I would like to
work for companies within the (renewable) energy-sector.

My question to you is: Does anyone know people who to contact or who can
help me further in
my conquest for a (temporary) job.

You can contact me for more details and my C.V. (m.deboer@ecn.nl).

Best regards,

Martin de Boer

From r.smit at tebodin.nl Wed Oct 9 08:18:36 1996
From: r.smit at tebodin.nl (Smit R.)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:14 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Priority: normal
Message-ID: <2B4E63F13B3@TEB-811-A1>

Hello,
I am new on this mailing list. I am working for Tebodin in the
Netherlands and are currently writing a comprehensive report on
innovative waste processing technologies for the Dutch Ministry of
Environment. This also includes gaasification and concerning this I
have the following question: does anybody have gas specifications for
gasification product gas to be burned in engines/turbines i.e. maximum
tar, PM content etc.?

Regards,

Robin Smit

----------------------------------------------------
Mr. Robin Smit (M.Env.Sc.)

Tebodin Consultants & Engineers B.V.
Department of Energy and Environmental Technology
PO Box 16029, Den Haag, The Netherlands
http://www.tebodin.nl
phone +31 70 3480402 (b/h)
facsimile +31 70 3480591
----------------------------------------------------

From 73002.1213 at CompuServe.COM Thu Oct 10 00:42:45 1996
From: 73002.1213 at CompuServe.COM (Tom Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:14 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Priority: normal
Message-ID: <961010044508_73002.1213_FHM53-5@CompuServe.COM>

Dear Robin;

The alkali metal is the pain problem for turbines: Should be less than 24 parts
per billion. (Many of us feel that this is too small by 10 or 100, but if the
manufacturer doesn't know he will make the number very small to be safe.

Tars are not such a problem - if you can get them into the combustor they will
burn.

The pressure is a nuisance: the turbine will run at 8-20 atmospheres, so it is
most convenient to run the gasifier also at this pressure. But pressure systems
are much more difficult than atmospheric gasifiers.

Good luck, TOM REED

From peva149 at sunoa.cira.it Thu Oct 10 10:12:18 1996
From: peva149 at sunoa.cira.it (Pesce Valter)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:14 2004
Subject: GAS-L: get digestion-list.archive.9606
Message-ID: <9610101416.AA19184@sunoa>

get digestion-list.archive.9606

From 73002.1213 at CompuServe.COM Thu Oct 17 03:30:16 1996
From: 73002.1213 at CompuServe.COM (Tom Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:14 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Two BIG gasifiers
Message-ID: <961017073152_73002.1213_FHM31-13@CompuServe.COM>

Hi gasification: (Written at 2 AM in Strassburg, between
trains, heading for Zurich)

Yesterday I travelled with Eric Rensfelt of Studsvick about 800 km to see two
important gasifiers.

The first is a circulating fluidized bed, 35 MW thermal at Goteverken Energy
Systems and has been in operation with 85-90% availability for nearly six years.
It provides gas for a lime kiln at a very large paper plant and gas for drying
chips (sometimes 58% MC bark) for the gasifier. It preheats its air and uses a
cyclone to clean the gas down to 20 g/nm3, sufficient for the kiln. About 30
meters tall, it was a thrill to stand on top, looking at the piles of wood and
chips used in the paper mill. The lime kiln was 100 m long and had a beautiful
flame (not operating from the gas yesterday).

>From there we went to Varnamo to see the 20 MWt, 6 MWe using a Ruston Typhoon
turbine (4.2 MW) and a 1.8 MW steam turbine. It also generates 9 MW of district
heat, making it 82% efficient. It was built for Sydkraft, a large private
utility in Sweden. Built by Ahlstrom, (they are now a part of Foster Wheeler(.
The project started in 1991; various parts were tested and a few weeks ago a
whole week was completed with all parts running - a milestone in power
generation history. A beautiful plant, beautifully explained by Magnus
Neergard.

So, gasification is alive and well - and maybe even commercial, here in Sweden,
land of the high CO2 tax and enormous forests. Incidentally, I am sorry to
miss Autumn in Golden, CO or New England; however, it is jsut as beautiful here
in Sweden.

When I checked out of the Royal Viking (Radisson) Hotel I told them I was
leaving for three reasons:
I had eaten all the dishes in the restaurant
I had heard all the wonderful classical Pier Gynt and other music in my room
too many times
I don't have an overcoat, and each day is a degree (C) or so colder! I'm
heading South to Switzerland!

Cheers, TOM REED

From 73002.1213 at CompuServe.COM Thu Oct 17 03:30:15 1996
From: 73002.1213 at CompuServe.COM (Tom Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:14 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Charcoal, yes or no?
Message-ID: <961017073143_73002.1213_FHM31-11@CompuServe.COM>

Stovers &Gasifiers all: (Strassburg station, 2
AM, Tues. 10/15/96)

Charcoal is the oldest "synthetic fuel" developed by humans and has been made
for at least 10,000 years. No charcoal = no bronze or iron age, no civilization
as we know it. However, it's use in industrial countries has slipped primarily
to recreational use in barbecues and chemical uses. In many developing
countries it is still the fuel of choice.

The classical manufacture of charcoal is very inefficient. The typical yield,
energy basis is 20-40% of the value of the wood or biomass. The rest goes up in
polluting smoke. In special units the "smoke" was condensed to give methanol,
acetic acid, acetone and many other chemicals up to about 1950. However, these
are all made much more cheaply now from petroleum. So a Developing Country*
charcoal kiln is also a major source of pollution.

It is easy to make a gasifier to operate on charcoal, and at the beginning of
World War II most gas generators used charcoal. However, the forest was
disappearing so fast that techniques were developed to use whole (<20% moisture)
wood. Our inverted downdraft stove cooks with the vapor and makes charcoal.

Speaking personally, I find cooking with charcoal a great nuisance. It is hard
to light, hard to control once lit, and continues to burn many hours after the
food is cooked. So, when we developed the inverted downdraft gasifier that
produces 25% charcoal, I considered that feature to be a drawback. But my
partner, Harry LaFontaine, considered it to be a positive feature and now Ron
Larson also thinks so.

Visiting Prasd and Moerman last week, they both expressed the opinion that
making charcoal was dirty and wasteful and should not be encouraged.

SO MUCH FOR DEVELOPED COUNTRIES*

In many developing countries, charcoal is the fuel of choice. Ron Larson
contacted me in 1993 and asked if I knew any way to cook with the volatiles and
make charcoal. I said, unfortunately yes. We have continued to develop this
stove and it is an excellent charcoal producer. (Most third world charcoal
making is lucky to reach 20% efficiency.) In larger size it could be good for
baking, brickmaking etc. with charcoal as the byproduct.

And Mike Antal now has a process that makes 40-45% charcoal. I think it could
be practical.

So we have here the making of a fine debate - should be proceed to help make
charcoal in developing countries in our more efficient fashion or should we try
to modify the stove to use ALL the fuel for cooking.

Opinions? TOM REED

* I hate the term "Developing Countries". It sounds somewhat patronizing. It
also seems to imply that Europe and the US are "Developed" and won't change. In
fact, I suspect India will "pass up" the developed countries in 2096 - they are
smarter and work harder and are more democratic - and bigger. China will follow
a few generations later. Does anyone have a better term?

Mike: Where are you? Where is your charcoal process?

From r.smit at tebodin.nl Thu Oct 17 05:03:12 1996
From: r.smit at tebodin.nl (Smit R.)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:14 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Varnamo or/and Vamamo?
Message-ID: <371A9951D30@TEB-811-A1>

Tom Reed wrote about a gasifier in Varnamo, Sweden formerly built
by Ahlstrom. This is confusing as I know also about a company called
Oy Bioflow (Sydkraft/Foster Wheeler joint venture) developing a
high-pressure CFB gasifier for wood with STAG in Vamamo, Finland.
Does anybody know if my information about Finland is right and if I
am not confusing Finland and Sweden?

Thanks

----------------------------------------------------
Mr. Robin Smit (M.Env.Sc.)

From Yrjo.Solantausta at vtt.fi Thu Oct 17 05:21:44 1996
From: Yrjo.Solantausta at vtt.fi (Yrjo Solantausta)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:14 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Varnamo or/and Vamamo?
Message-ID: <199610170925.MAA19714@vttmail.vtt.fi>

Its Varnamo (the first letter a is actually an a umlaut) in Sweden. You are
in fact talking about the same plant.
Yrjo

At 11:03 17.10.1996 GMT+0100, you wrote:
>Tom Reed wrote about a gasifier in Varnamo, Sweden formerly built
>by Ahlstrom. This is confusing as I know also about a company called
>Oy Bioflow (Sydkraft/Foster Wheeler joint venture) developing a
>high-pressure CFB gasifier for wood with STAG in Vamamo, Finland.
>Does anybody know if my information about Finland is right and if I
>am not confusing Finland and Sweden?
>
>Thanks
>
>----------------------------------------------------
>Mr. Robin Smit (M.Env.Sc.)
>
>Tebodin Consultants & Engineers B.V.
>Department of Energy and Environmental Technology
>PO Box 16029, Den Haag, The Netherlands
>http://www.tebodin.nl
>phone +31 70 3480402 (b/h)
>facsimile +31 70 3480591
>----------------------------------------------------
>
>

From jaakko.saastamoinen at vtt.fi Thu Oct 17 05:24:35 1996
From: jaakko.saastamoinen at vtt.fi (Jaakko Saastamoinen)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:14 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Varnamo or/and Vamamo?
Message-ID: <199610170928.MAA20004@vttmail.vtt.fi>

Foster Wheeler has bought the part of Alhstrom company that built the
gasifier in Varnamo. People working with gasification in the former Ahlstrom
(in Karhula, Finland) are now working in Foster Wheeeler (in Karhula,
Finland). So Ahlstrom company is no longer operating in fluidized bed
combustion/gasification areas, but it still operates in recovery boiler
business and others.

Jaakko Saastamoinen
VTT Energy, Finland

From antal at wiliki.eng.hawaii.edu Thu Oct 17 14:00:10 1996
From: antal at wiliki.eng.hawaii.edu (Michael Antal)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:14 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Re: Charcoal, yes or no?
In-Reply-To: <961017073143_73002.1213_FHM31-11@CompuServe.COM>
Message-ID: <Pine.HPP.3.95.961017075721.22032B-100000@wiliki.eng.hawaii.edu>

Dear Tom: thanks for your message. Actually, we achieve yields of 41 to
62% charcoal, depending on the feedstock. We have recently learned how to
make high-yield activated carbons from biomass and realize yields of 25 to
30% of a good quality activated carbon based on the dry weight of the raw
biomass feedstock. So we get higher yields of activated carbon than
industry usually gets of charcoal. The charcoal you cook with must be the
cheap Kingsford variety made from coal. Real charcoal burns vigorously in
a good grill with underfire air. Concerning our status: I have a business
plan and am prepared to invest $25,000 of my own money in the production
of macadamia nut shell charcoal (and activated carbons). We are operating
our pilot plant to test the market. I hope that once the market is
established, a macadamia nut factory will partner with me. Maybe you'd
like to invest in a good cause? Have a safe journey. Best regards,
Michael.

From larcon at csn.net Fri Oct 18 23:42:20 1996
From: larcon at csn.net (Ronal Larson)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:14 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Re: Charcoal, yes or no?
In-Reply-To: <961017073143_73002.1213_FHM31-11@CompuServe.COM>
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9610182105.A14081-0100000@teal.csn.net>

Following up on Tom Reed's request yesterday to further discuss charcoal.

First, thanks to Mike Antal for sticking up for charcoal. I am no
expert on using charcoal - but I have rarely seen smoke and fumes when I
use it or when watching it be used by skilled usrs. I have never seen
problems in starting it (by third world cooks) - but, like Tom, I also
have had problems. These are certainly true with the "Kingsford coal"
type - but also when using small pieces or my own home-made briquettes.

Mike - you have not (I think) heard the stoves list's recent
discussion on the health impacts of cookstoves. Do you have any special
information on this subject - perhaps especially relative to CO? My
perception is that there is a decided health improvement in charcoal
stoves over wood stoves.

I understand one reason why Prasad and Etienne should have an
aversion to charcoal - its present wasteful method of manufacture. But
if charcoal is captured as a byproduct of a cooking process that is much
more healthful, with high efficiency, then I don't understand this aversion.

The thousands of years of charcoal production and willlingness to
pay more than twice as much for cooking a meal should be a good
indication that charcoal has some merit. Can anyone explain it on any
basis other than reduced smoke and reduced time in tending?

One experiential caution and admission. I gave some of my old
scrap charcoal (including brands) to a needy local Ethiopian family -
thinking of barbecue use only. When they used it indoors for making
coffee, it was certainly not satisfactory - even setting off an alarm. I
now need to get the wife to try some that at least looks good to me.
Developing country (the World Bank uses this term - so I think we can
also) charcoal producers undoubtedly know how to get the right (on
average) amount of residual gases in the charcoal to balance off smoke
and ease of starting. Maybe when I have their experience, I'll know
also. Does anyone know of any simple tests that knowledgeable buyers use
to select pieces that fit their own cooking needs?

Ron Larson

From onar at hsr.no Sun Oct 20 14:58:01 1996
From: onar at hsr.no (Onar Aam)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:14 2004
Subject: GAS-L: question for Tom Reed
Message-ID: <199610201901.UAA13183@broremann.hsr.no>

Hi, some while back I read about a biomass gasifier developed
by SynGas Inc in Golden, Co in the mid-eighties. I can't remember
whether you were involved in that project or not, but you should
know about it. The prototype gasifier was as I recall a 54 inch
wide, 7MW propane driven downdraft gasifier. What happened to it
Did it ever become economically viable? Is SynGas still alive and
kicking?

Onar.

From milnet at tcplink.nrel.gov Mon Oct 21 12:02:35 1996
From: milnet at tcplink.nrel.gov (milnet@tcplink.nrel.gov)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:14 2004
Subject: GAS-L: question for Tom Reed
Message-ID: <9609218459.AA845917626@tcplink.nrel.gov>

I'm sure Tom Reed will follow with later details, but there is a
report on the pilot-scale results for the system in Golden, Colorado.
It is: "Fundamentals, Development and Scaleup of the Air-Oxygen
Stratified Downdraft Gasifier". T.B. Reed. B. Levie and M.S. Graboski.
l June, 1988. PNL-6600. Pacific Northwest Laboratory. It should be
available from NTIS.

Tom Milne,
NREL, milnet@tcplink.nrel.gov

______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: GAS-L: question for Tom Reed
Author: gasification@crest.org at SMTP
Date: 10/20/96 1:20 PM

From antal at wiliki.eng.hawaii.edu Mon Oct 21 13:57:16 1996
From: antal at wiliki.eng.hawaii.edu (Michael Antal)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:14 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Re: Charcoal, yes or no?
In-Reply-To: <Pine.3.89.9610182105.A14081-0100000@teal.csn.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.HPP.3.95.961021075832.5551C-100000@wiliki.eng.hawaii.edu>

Dear Ron: concerning emissions from stoves: I suppose that you know Kirk
Smith (formerly of the EWC, now Berkeley)? He is the expert on such
matters. Regards, Michael Antal.

From 73002.1213 at CompuServe.COM Tue Oct 22 02:11:36 1996
From: 73002.1213 at CompuServe.COM (Tom Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:14 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Rumford, Altimira
Message-ID: <961022061359_73002.1213_FHM48-1@CompuServe.COM>

Hi!

All work and no play makes Tom a dull boy. I arrived in Munich at noon Sunday
and my plane wasn't until 7, so I looked at the map, what to do.

You may remember that Ron Larson and I recommended strongly the collected works
of Benjamin Thompson, Lord Rumford (Sandford Brown, Harvard Press?). He has
more understanding of stoves than anyone I have yet seen on the stove net. He
was the right hand man of the King of Bavaria 1790-1810 and made many changes
there and many of his most important discoveries there. I was delighted to find
the "Englische Gartens", founded by Rumford in walking distance of the station.

I was more delighted to find the Rumford Schloww (castle) there. The day before
I had visited the King Ludwig schlosses, Linderhof and Neuschwanstein. The
Rumford Schloss is very modest by comparison, but there it was in the Garten.

The largest technical museum in the world is the Deutsch museum, so I went there
next. A wonderful museum, too big to see in a week, let alone my 3 hours.
However, they have a full scale reproduction of the cave paintings at Altimira
that thrilled me. But I didn't find anything on gasifiers and not much on
stoves.

Put these on your list to see next time you are in Muensch.

Regards, TOM REED

From onar at hsr.no Wed Oct 23 12:08:19 1996
From: onar at hsr.no (Onar Åm)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:14 2004
Subject: GAS-L: The IBT gasifier
Message-ID: <199610231611.SAA27780@johanna4.hsr.no>

Hi guys, does anyone have information on the IBT biomass gasifier?
As far as I can see the gasifier is successfully used in
gasification of solid municipal waste. The flowchart of
the gasification plant does not give any indication of what
kind of gasifier is used, but the tar cleaning and recycling
system implies that it is an updraft gasifier. The lowest
feed heating value that the gasifier can take is 3.55 kWh/kg
which is not exactly impressing for an updraft gasifier.
(corresponds to wood with about 35% water content.)
Anyway, any technical data on the gasifier and on the economy
of the system would be greatly appreciated.

On another subject: I know that wood produces more coal than can
be gasified by oxydized wood pyrolysis gases. My impression is that
this is not the case for municipal waste. There seems to be
produced more pyrolysis gas than coal from it. Is this just my
imagination, or is my observation correct?

Onar.

From CCHEN at UGA.CC.UGA.EDU Thu Oct 24 07:59:26 1996
From: CCHEN at UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (C. Chen)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:14 2004
Subject: GAS-L: subscription
Message-ID: <961024.080157.EDT.CCHEN@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU>

Subscription

C. Chen

cchen@uga.cc.uga.edu

From Kati.Veijonen at vtt.fi Mon Oct 28 06:24:23 1996
From: Kati.Veijonen at vtt.fi (Kati Veijonen)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:14 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Versatile utilization of biomass and recycled fuels for local energy planners
Message-ID: <199610281047.MAA25556@vttmail.vtt.fi>

Training programme for local energy planners
'NEW OPTIONS IN LOCAL ENERGY PLANNING'
18th - 22nd November 1996, Jyvaskyla, Finland

VTT Energy (Technical research centre of Finland, Energy department) and
engineering office Elomatic from Jyvaskyla are organizing an one week
training programme in Central Finland. The training programme consists of
lectures and site visits to local energy plants. The programme also includes
some case studies.

Structure of the Programme
- Energy management in Finland
- Heat and power production based on Finnish know-how, general
- Biomass production and logistics system in Finland
- Planning of district heating system (DH)
- Combustion technology for solid fuel heating plant
- Flue gas cleaning and condensing in district heating plant
- Small-scale CHP plant (combined heat and power, electricity output <10 MWe)
- Site visits to different DH and CHP plants fueled by biomass and/or
recycled fuels

Who should attend
- local energy planners
- energy managers
- fuel producers or suppliers
- municipal energy administrators

The total number of participants will be 10 - 15.

Language
English

Venue

The training programme will take place in the facilities of VTT Energy in
Jyvaskyla. The participants will be accomodated in hotel Alexandra. The
organizers will arrange transportation from the hotel to the venue.

Participation fee

The implementation of the training programme will be financed by the ALTENER
project Plan for Increasing Use of Renewable Energy Sources for District
Heating in Province of Central Finland (AL/ 55/95/FIN).
The participation fee will be 2000 FIM (about 350 ECU) excl. VAT and it will
consist of the training material, meals, hotel fees and transportation in
Jyvaskyla and during the site visits. VTT Energy will invoice the
participants before the beginning of the training programme.

For more information and the registration form, please contact to

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^ ^
^ Kati Veijonen M.Sc.(Tech.) Tel. +358 14 672 709 ^
^ Research scientist ^
^ VTT Energy Fax. +358 14 672 598 ^
^ P.O.Box 1603 Mobile phone: +358 40 548 0957 ^
^ 40101 Jyvaskyla E-mail. Kati.Veijonen@vtt.fi ^
^ Finland ^
^ ^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

From aronning at online.no Tue Oct 29 01:23:41 1996
From: aronning at online.no (Hanne og Ingunn)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:14 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Inf.req.:Energy recovery in charcoal production
Message-ID: <v01510100ae9b6daf3a11@[193.212.108.160]>

Hello !
We are working on a project for Norwegian industry.One of the topics is to
examine technology for pyrolysis of biomass / charcoal production,
including energy consumption/production, running- and investment costs.
Energy recovery is essential.

The main goal is to produce charcoal for industrial use, but we are also
interested in use of the pyrolysis gas/oil for energy purposes.

If anyone has information on this subject, please contact us ! We are
interested in :
- books, articles etc.
- information from operating plants
- contact with producers of such technology

Thank you !

Hanne Raadal
Ingunn Saur

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
STIFTELSEN ØSTFOLDFORSKNING

Fredrikstad- Postadresse
kontoret Postboks 276 Postboks 573 Busterud
N-1601 Fredrikstad N-1754 Halden
Kontoradresse: Kontoradresse
K.G. Meldahls vei 9 Busterudgt. 3
N-1671 Kråkerøy N-1776 Halden
Telefon: 69 35 11 00 Telefon: 69 14 74 00
Telefax: 69 34 24 94 Telefax: 69 14 74 14
email: stoe@online.no
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

From brr at cc.iitb.ernet.in Wed Oct 30 00:44:51 1996
From: brr at cc.iitb.ernet.in (b rajaram)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:14 2004
Subject: GAS-L: charcoal, yes or no?
Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.3.95.961030110940.31478H-100000@tulsi.cc.iitb.ernet.in>

Yes, there is a law of nature that says that
when O2 passes up through a surplus of hot
(>700C) carbon, it will form CO in preference
to CO2. So charcoal stoves indoors are a potential hazard. @b

I believe I remember that in Korea the use of charcoal
braziers has religious strictures promoting putting
used ash on top of the charcoal. Is used ash catalytic to @b

CO + 1/2 O2 ===> CO2 ?@b

(Kirk - yesterday I visited the TREES project outside
Delhi and saw your NEW Test Kitchen hut.
Looks much better than the Hawaiin one! i hope you will
test charcoal heating in these huts with an without an ash cover. )@b

There is also concern about using producer (city)
gas in villages because of the high CO content.
However, no matter how clean the gas, there is a
STRONG odor from minor constituents that can warn
the housewife - if she will pay attention. No odorant ne
cessary. If this isn't enough, a dose of methyl
mercaptan in the gas will drive her out of the house.
In Shandong Province, there are three villages using
stored producer gas? Ralph - any concern about CO?
Any fatalities yet? How about a cheap CO
detertor/ smoke alarm? The first fatality will likely
be the end of all stove and gasifier programs.
Death from domestic devils (emphysema, glaucoma,...)
can be tolerated forever; death from foreign devils
is an excuse to throw them out. @b

Caution, TOM REED@b

Beware, TOM REED@b

From tmiles at teleport.com Wed Oct 30 11:19:15 1996
From: tmiles at teleport.com (Tom Miles)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:14 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Natural Gas/Biomass Combined Cycle
Message-ID: <199610301616.IAA05884@greta.teleport.com>

Natural Gas Turbines and Biomass Plants:

Are there economic benefits to adding a natural gas fired gas turbine to an
existing biomass power plant? If so at what sizes, capacities, costs and
with what benefits?

Thomas R. Miles
Consulting Design Engineer
Portland, OR USA
tmiles@teleport.com

From onar at hsr.no Thu Oct 31 08:58:48 1996
From: onar at hsr.no (Onar Åm)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:14 2004
Subject: GAS-L: The NREL report
Message-ID: <199610311356.OAA19430@johanna4.hsr.no>

I've just worked myself through the NREL report on gasification and
novel thermal processes, and the thing that struck me was the cost
estimates. My only reaction is: has the world gone mad? The figures
seemed to be way out of proportion. The two things I reacted most to
was the cost estimates of MSW pre-processing plants (about $60,000,000
for about 1000 t/d) and gas turbines (about $40,000,000 for about 40 MW).
To me this seems to be off target by a factor of at least 10. I mean, if
you divide the prices you get a capital cost of $2,400 per kg/h, and
$1,000,000 per MWe. That's madness!

Second, the process equipment in isolation ranged in investment costs
from $30,000,000 to $100,000,000. The equipment was constructed for
handling approximately 1000 t/d. This too is madness. Our gasifiers
we can handle the same amount of MSW for an investment cost of about
$5,000,000. (Cleaning system beyond cyclones and scrubbing not included)

My own estimate is that a 1000 t/d preprocessing plant (chopping and
compression) costs no more than $10,000,000 to build, and a power plant
costs at the very most $250,000 per MW. Can anyone give me a good reason
why these estimates should not hold?

If the costs reflected in the NREL report really are representative for
the MSW gasification industry then I understand why there are no real
successstories so far.

Onar.

From 73002.1213 at CompuServe.COM Thu Oct 31 20:37:08 1996
From: 73002.1213 at CompuServe.COM (Tom Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:14 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Re: Charcoal, yes or no?
Message-ID: <961101013224_73002.1213_FHM62-11@CompuServe.COM>

(You may have already received this - I'm not sure what transmissions I have
sent - sorry.)

Ron et al:

Yes, there is a law of nature that says that when O2 passes up through a surplus
of hot (>700C) carbon, it will form CO in preference to CO2. So charcoal stoves
indoors are a potential hazard.

I believe I remember that in Korea the use of charcoal braziers has religious
strictures promoting putting used ash on top of the charcoal. Is used ash
catalytic to

CO + 1/2 O2 ===> CO2 ?

(Kirk - yesterday I visited the TREES project outside Delhi and saw your NEW
Test Kitchen hut. Looks much better than the Hawaiin one! i hope you will test
charcoal heating in these huts with an without an ash cover. )

There is also concern about using producer (city) gas in villages because of the
high CO content. However, no matter how clean the gas, there is a STRONG odor
from minor constituents that can warn the housewife - if she will pay attention.
No odorant necessary. If this isn't enough, a dose of methyl mercaptan in the
gas will drive her out of the house. In Shandong Province, there are three
villages using stored producer gas? Ralph - any concern about CO? Any
fatalities yet? How about a cheap CO detertor/ smoke alarm? The first
fatality will likely be the end of all stove and gasifier programs. Death from
domestic devils (emphysema, glaucoma,...) can be tolerated forever; death from
foreign devils is an excuse to throw them out.

Caution, TOM REED

Beware, TOM REED

From 73002.1213 at CompuServe.COM Thu Oct 31 20:37:53 1996
From: 73002.1213 at CompuServe.COM (Tom Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:14 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Tars: Part 1
Message-ID: <961101013130_73002.1213_FHM62-6@CompuServe.COM>

Hi to the Gasification Net from Bangkok:

Here are three questions that I would appreciate hearing your viewpoints on.
I'll hold my viewpoint until the discussion gets "hot":

1) Once upon a time it was thought that the main problem in biomass
gasification was to make a combustible gas. No longer. The current perception
is that ALL gasifiers make major amounts of tar and the main problem is
perceived as tar cleanup.

In turn the perception of many is that if we could condense and identify ALL
possible organic compounds, we would somehow measure TAR and somehow that would
then permit us to build gasifiers. Discussions of tars have been a major theme
everywhere I went.

The Swiss (Rudi Buehler and others) seem to be in the lead of greater
condensation at any cost, but a number of other labs use 4-6-or 8 condensation
units in a train. On the other hand, there is another view that complete
condensation measures the total condensibles including benzene and other fuels.
It is a long stretch of the mind to call benzene "tar".

2) It is generally accepted that updraft gasifiers make the most tar (5-20%?),
fluidized beds make intermediate amounts (1-5%) and downdrafts make low tar
(.01-.05%, 100-500 ppm). Some of the people I visited believe that the tars in
some downdrafts are low enough to require NO removal for engine and thermal use.

3) Whatever the truth in the above questions, I believe that a recording "tar"
or "condensible" meter would greatly advance gasifier experimentation and
improvement. Currently all measurements are batch mode, a pain in the neck, and
don't permit observing the effect of the continuing smaller changes on "tar"
output.

Let's hear your opinions.

Yours truly, TOM REED

(Moderator and peace maker)

From 73002.1213 at CompuServe.COM Thu Oct 31 20:39:12 1996
From: 73002.1213 at CompuServe.COM (Tom Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:14 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Re: Updrafts in England, Downdrafts in India.
Message-ID: <961101013240_73002.1213_FHM62-12@CompuServe.COM>

(You may have already received this - I'm not sure what transmissions I have
sent - sorry.)

Soren (and all):

The updraft gasifier is being developed by Richard J. McLellan, Tel: 0121 565
2766; Fax; 0121 555 5681 (no E-mail). I was very surprised to discover that
they are building a small updraft. Gasifier very cheap, gas cleanup more
expensive.

I am now in the MECCA of gasification in Bangalore at the Indian Institute of
Science. Mukunda is head of about 20 people working on gasifiers. His gasifier
is a major improvement over our 3 t/hr "stratified downdraft". Tar 80-120
ppmin raw gas; char/ash typically <1%. Novel design. They have a dozen
installations around India.

TOmorrow I go to visit a village 50 km from Bangalore where a gasifier is used
in the silk industry for water boiling. Traditional efficiency 3%; gasifier
efficiency about 40%. Potential installations, 20,000.

Keep in touch, TOM

From 73002.1213 at CompuServe.COM Thu Oct 31 20:41:08 1996
From: 73002.1213 at CompuServe.COM (Tom Reed)
Date: Tue Aug 31 21:07:14 2004
Subject: GAS-L: Grovers address, Tom's trip
Message-ID: <961101013602_73002.1213_FHM62-23@CompuServe.COM>

I believe the following letter was sent by Gayathri in Bangalore when I couldn't
contact Compuserve. If you've seen it, sorry..

Hi eveyone:

There have been questions about P.D. Grover's whereabouts. I had lunch with
Grover and Kishore Wednesday, and he sends his regards. He has just retired
from IIT Delhi, but still has his lab there. Retired means still working at IIT
and consulting for half a dozen companies and has an office at one. He looks
great and is still a major major source of information on rice hull silica,
stoves, pyrolysers, charcoal, gasifiers etc. He didn't know his internet
number, but expects to soon. You can reach him at:

B-36, Gian Deep Apartment, 8, Mayur Vihar, Phase I, Delhi - 110 091; Tel: 225
2541 or CMS Energy Systems, Ltd., 44 Community Centre, East of Kallash, New
Delhi 110 065, Tel: 623 5026, Fx: 6840159, 6218273.

Gayathri: You might send this message to others in India who would be
interested.

Regards to all,
TOM REED

BioEnergy Lists: Gasifiers & Gasification

October 1996 Gasification Archive